Author name: Marc Alexander

Winning Anti-SLAPP Defendant Receives Less Than 10% Of Requested Fees

Cases: Billing Record Substantiation, Cases: SLAPP, Cases: Standard of Review

Fourth District, Division Three Affirm Lower Court Determination That Requested Fees Were Excessive–Involving Overstaffing, Vague Block Billing, and Billing for Anti-SLAPP Motion Tasks.             Prevailing defendants in anti-SLAPP proceedings are entitled to attorney’s fees and costs.  Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(c).  However, the prevailing defendant can only recover for anti-SLAPP activities, not […]

Ninth Circuit Issues A Pair Of American With Disabilities Act Decisions On Attorney’s Fees—Confronting Reduction Factors And A Standing Issue

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Federal Court of Appeals Overturns Two Fee Denial Orders in ADA Cases.             The American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. secs. 12101-12213, has a federal fee-shifting provision in section 12205, which allows a district court “in its discretion” to award the “prevailing party … a reasonable attorney’s fees.”  In

Family Law Court Did Not Err In Considering Subsequent Income Disparity Information In Awarding Attorneys Fees Under Family Code Sections 2030 and 2032

Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes, Cases: Standard of Review

Information Showing Less of an Income Disparity Properly Considering in Determining Amount of Fees Awardable to Mother For Prevailing in Prior Appeals.             Under Family Code section 2030, the trial court has discretion to award attorney’s fees in family law actions to ensure that each party has access to legal representation.  In

Winning Plaintiffs In Tax Refund Cases Against Franchise Tax Board Can Seek Fees Under Either Revenue And Taxation Code Section 19717 Or Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021.5

Cases: Taxation

First District, Division One Finds Revenue and Taxation Code section 19717 is Not the Exclusive Means of Recovering Attorney’s Fees in a Tax Refund Case.             Okay, for those tax practitioners representing California state taxpayers, we have a post of interest to you on a recent published decision coming out of the

Losing Administrative Mandamus Plaintiff Suffers Code Of Civil Procedure Section 128.7 Fee Sanctions For Filing An Untimely, Meritless Reconsideration Motion

Cases: Sanctions

Second District, Division Six Affirms Sanctions Award.             Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a) is a statutory provision allowing an impacted party to move for reconsideration of an order within 10 days after service of notice of the order if there are new facts, circumstances or law that should be taken into

Conflicting Attorneys’ Claims In Minor’s Compromise Proceedings: Appellate Split Of Opinion On Whether Trial Court Can Determine in Probate Code Section 3601 Proceeding Or Recourse Must Be Had In A Separate Action

Cases: Minors

Part 2 of 2—Fourth District Divisions Are Split on the Issue.             In Part 1 of 2 of our discussion on minor’s compromise (see August 10, 2008 post), we explored the statutory grant in Probate Code section 3601 regarding approval of attorney’s fees in minor’s compromise proceedings, augmented by a look at

Second District, Division Eight Follows Leach Rule On Judicial Estoppel In Section 1717 Situations

Cases: Estoppel, Cases: Section 1717

Division Eight Refuses to Follow Manier’s “Allegations Alone Suffice” Estoppel Theory.             In a wild case involving contentions of contract formation, untimely acceptance, and a critically forged document, the Second District, Division Eight affirmed a trial court’s equitable rulings but modified a judgment to delete an attorney’s fees award against a nonsignatory

Defendant Successfully Obtains Recovery Of Attorney’s Fees And Costs For Successfully Setting Aside A Default And Also Obtains Appellate Sanctions Based On Plaintiff’s Frivolous Appeal

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Sanctions

Fifth District Reminds Appealing Litigants and Appellate Counsel That They Should Not “Bait and Switch” or Simply “Vent Their Spleen” Before the Appellate Courts.             The next case we discuss reinforces that appellate practice has different rules, with litigants needing to carefully assess whether they have some legal or factual errors of

Prevailing FEHA Plaintiff Awarded $499,245.80—Lodestar Augmented By 1.55 Multiplier—In Unpublished Decision

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

First District Affirms Substantial Fee Award and Compensatory Judgment Following Successful Bench Trial for Plaintiff.             Government Code section 12965(b) authorizes an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing party in an action brought under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).  Normally, the prevailing plaintiff should be awarded

Scroll to Top